Efetividade dos direitos trabalhistas e os princípios constitucionais concretizadores da proteção laboral

The Brazilian Constitution aims to regularize the broadest possible the fundamental grounded in the value and supreme principle of human dignity, supporting a Democratic State of Law, to essentially give basic rights to all for a dignified existence. As the result of a historical development, fundamental rights incorporated by legal order represents a real reaction against acts that ignored the dignity of each person in one of these scenarios, especially inserted into the labor relationship, the principle of protection comes to balance and compose such relationship between employers and workers, raising this principle as axiological essence of this subject, based especially on the protection and guarantee of fundamental rights of the worker. For this study, was developed a literature research using books, legislation, legal websites and articles related to the subject, in order to analyze the principle of protection insert in the legal order, properly authoritative on the principle of equality, the social value of the work of human dignity to confer protection to the most vulnerable and admittedly weak of the labor relationship in order to serve the specific regulations legal practical tools and effective protection, against the employer hierarchical power and steering that can not change into abuses and attacks on the fundamental rights of the worker. In conclusion, is not enough, recognizing the vulnerability of the worker, it is necessary to carry out protective legal instruments in line with the the human dignity, consectário logical fundamental rights of workers, to be held in a proportional manner and sometimes flexible, depending on the case. Protection has a beginning and end to ensure that the human dignity that must presuppose a working relationship achieved by orderly and normative power of constitutional norms, with the aim of designing that labor is not an end in itself, but a means to the achievement of the economic advancement by promoting social development and providing necessary support for the increasingly marked impairment of fundamental rights of the worker

Frontex and the respect of fundamental rights: from better protection to full responsibility. EPC Policy Brief, 3 June 2014

The European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) was created to improve border management cooperation between Member States. Seen from its inception as a security-oriented body, tools and rules have been gradually developed to enhance the human rights dimension and protection regarding Frontex activities. However, this step has not been accompanied with the explicit recognition of Frontex’s legal responsibility regarding violations of human rights occurring during joint operations it coordinates. Despite Frontex position rejecting such a responsibility, it is no longer clear whether this position can be maintained, as Yves Pascouau and Pascal Schumacher demonstrate in this Policy Brief.

Controlling Irregular Migration in Canada: Reconciling Security Concerns with Human Rights Protection

International human rights law, international humanitarian law, international refugee law and international criminal law: each chapter of this corpus stands as a fundamental defense against assaults on our common humanity… The very power of these rules lies in the fact that they protect even the most vulnerable, and bind even the most powerful. No one stands so high as to be above the reach of their authority. No one falls so low as to be below the guard of their protection. Sergio Vieira de Mello, United Nations General Assembly, November 2002.

The Court of Justice of the European Union as a fundamental rights tribunal: challenges for the effective delivery of fundamental rights in the area of freedom, security and justice. CEPS Paper in Liberty and Security in Europe No. 49, 29 August 2012

This paper reflects on the challenges facing the effective implementation of the new EU fundamental rights architecture that emerged from the Lisbon Treaty. Particular attention is paid to the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and its ability to function as a ‘fundamental rights tribunal’. The paper first analyses the praxis of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and its long-standing experience in overseeing the practical implementation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Against this analysis, it then examines the readiness of the CJEU to live up to its consolidated and strengthened mandate on fundamental rights as one of the prime guarantors of the effective implementation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. We specifically review the role of ‘third-party interventions’ by non-governmental organisations, international and regional human rights actors as well as ‘interim relief measures’ when ensuring effective judicial protection of vulnerable individuals in cases of alleged violations of fundamental human rights. To flesh out our arguments, we rely on examples within the scope of the relatively new and complex domain of EU legislation, the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ), and its immigration, external border and asylum policies. In view of the fundamental rights-sensitive nature of these domains, which often encounter shifts of accountability and responsibility in their practical application, and the Lisbon Treaty’s expansion of the jurisdiction of the CJEU to interpret and review EU AFSJ legislation, this area can be seen as an excellent test case for the analyses at hand. The final section puts forth a set of policy suggestions that can assist the CJEU in the process of adjusting itself to the new fundamental rights context in a post-Lisbon Treaty setting.

Fundamental rights in the EU: three years after Lisbon, the Luxembourg perspective. Research Paper in Law (Cooperative Research Paper) 02/2013

For more than 10 years after the signature of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, the question of the protection of human rights had never been in issue. The emphasis was on the creation and consolidation of the common market establishing the free movement of persons, of services, of goods and of capital. Neither the initial Treaties nor the jurisprudence of the Court made any reference to the protection of human rights in the process of the creation of the common market. It all started in 1969 in the Stauder case with this very short sentence: “Interpreted in this way the provision at issue contains nothing capable of prejudicing the fundamental human rights enshrined in the general principles of Community law and protected by the Court”. Forty years later, with the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon, which came into force on 1 December 2009, fundamental rights are part of primary law. The achievement has been remarkable if we consider the very beginning of the process. It is not an exaggeration to say that the Court with its jurisprudence has been the driving force and the source of inspiration for this achievement.

Fundamental Rights of workers in the Digital Age: A methodological approach from a case study. WP C.S.D.L.E. "Massimo D'Antona" .INT - 89/2011

The relationship between employer and worker is not only obligatory but above all, as Sinzheimer said, a ‘relationship of power’. In the Digital Age this statement is confirmed by the massive introduction of ICT in most of the companies that increase, in practice, employer’s supervisory powers. This is a worrying issue for two reasons: on one hand, ICT emerge as a new way to weaken the effectiveness of fundamental rights and the right to dignity of workers; and, on the other hand, Spanish legal system does not offer appropriate solutions to ensure that efficacy. Moreover, in a scenario characterized by a hybridization of legal systems models –in which traditional hard law methods are combined with soft law and self regulation instruments–, the role of our case law has become very important in this issue. Nevertheless, despite the increase of judicialization undergone, solutions offered by Courts are so different that do not give enough legal certainty. Facing this situation, I suggest a methodological approach –using Alchourron and Bulygin’s normative systems theory and Alexy’s fundamental rights theory– which can open new spaces of decision to legal operators in order to solve properly these problems. This proposal can allow setting a policy that guarantees fundamental rights of workers, deepening their human freedom in companies from the Esping-Andersen’s de-commodification perspective. With this purpose, I examine electronic communications in the company as a case study.

The Triangular Relationship between Fundamental Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law in the EU: Towards an EU Copenhagen Mechanism. CEPS Paperbacks. November 2013

This study examines the protection of fundamental rights, democracy and rule of law in the European Union, and the challenges that arise in reflecting on ways to strengthen EU competences in these contested terrains. It provides a ‘state of play’ and critical account of EU-level policy and legal mechanisms assessing the relationship between rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights in the member states of the Union. The cross-cutting challenges affecting their uses, effective implementation and practical operability constitute a central point of the analysis. The study argues that the relationship between rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights is co-constitutive. Any future rule of law-related policy discussion in the EU should start from an understanding of the triangular relationship between these dimensions from the perspective of ‘democratic rule of law with fundamental rights���, i.e. the legally based rule of a democratic state that delivers fundamental rights. The three criteria are inherently and indivisibly interconnected, and interdependent on each of the others, and they cannot be separated without inflicting profound damage to the whole and changing its essential shape and configuration.

A ‘right to have rights��� in the EU public sphere? An Arendtian justification for the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

This paper discusses the Court’s reasoning in interpreting the EU Charter, using recent case law on horizontal effect as a case study. It identifies two possible means of interpreting the provisions of the Charter: firstly, an approach based on common values (e.g. equality or solidarity) and, secondly, an approach based on access to the public sphere. It argues in favour of the latter. Whereas an approach based on common values is more consonant with the development of the case law so far, it is conceptually problematic: it involves subjective assessments of the importance and degree of ‘sharedness’ of the value in question, which can undermine the equal constitutional status of different Charter provisions. Furthermore, it marginalises the Charter’s overall politically constructional character, which distinguishes it from other sources of rights protection listed in Art 6 TEU. The paper argues that, as the Charter’s provisions concretise the notion of political status in the EU, they have a primarily constitutional, rather than ethical, basis. Interpreting the Charter based on the very commitment to a process of sharing, drawing on Hannah Arendt’s idea of the ‘right to have rights��� (a right to access a political community on equal terms), is therefore preferable. This approach retains the pluralistic, post-national fabric of the EU polity, as it accommodates multiple narratives about its underlying values, while also having an inclusionary impact on previously underrepresented groups (e.g. non-market-active citizens or the sans-papiers) by recognising their equal political disposition.

Tribunais nacionais e tutela jurisdicional efetiva: da cooperação à integração judiciária no contencioso da união europeia

Tese de Doutoramento em Ciências Jurídicas (área de especialização em Ciências Jurídicas Públicas).

Does speed matter? : the impact of the EU membership incentive on rule adoption in minority language rights protection

Denna avhandling tar sin utgångspunkt i ett ifrågasättande av effektiviteten i EU:s konditionalitetspolitik avseende minoritetsrättigheter. Baserat på den rationalistiska teoretiska modellen, External Incentives Model of Governance, syftar denna hypotesprövande avhandling till att förklara om tidsavståndet på det potentiella EU medlemskapet påverkar lagstiftningsnivån avseende minoritetsspråksrättigheter. Mätningen av nivån på lagstiftningen avseende minoritetsspråksrättigheter begränsas till att omfatta icke-diskriminering, användning av minoritetsspråk i officiella sammanhang samt minoriteters språkliga rättigheter i utbildningen. Metodologiskt används ett jämförande angreppssätt både avseende tidsramen för studien, som sträcker sig mellan 2003 och 2010, men även avseende urvalet av stater. På basis av det \"mest lika systemet\" kategoriseras staterna i tre grupper efter deras olika tidsavstånd från det potentiella EU medlemskapet. Hypotesen som prövas är följande: ju kortare tidsavstånd till det potentiella EU medlemskapet desto större sannolikhet att staternas lagstiftningsnivå inom de tre områden som studeras har utvecklats till en hög nivå. Studien visar att hypotesen endast bekräftas delvis. Resultaten avseende icke-diskriminering visar att sambandet mellan tidsavståndet och nivån på lagstiftningen har ökat markant under den undersökta tidsperioden. Detta samband har endast stärkts mellan kategorin av stater som ligger tidsmässigt längst bort ett potentiellt EU medlemskap och de två kategorier som ligger närmare respektive närmast ett potentiellt EU medlemskap. Resultaten avseende användning av minoritetsspråk i officiella sammanhang och minoriteters språkliga rättigheter i utbildningen visar inget respektive nästan inget samband mellan tidsavståndet och utvecklingen på lagstiftningen mellan 2003 och 2010.

On safety and security in education : pedagogical needs and fundamental rights of learners

Resumen basado en el de la publicaci??n